Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: BluRay Audio Fromats and DMA-8

This is topic BluRay Audio Fromats and DMA-8 in forum Digital Cinema Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=000255

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 10-03-2008, 12:38 PM:

I've really about had it with BluRay's proprietary audio formats.

Two formats in particular.

DolbyTrueHD and DTS Master Audio. There is no way to know when ordering a BluRay from Amazon weather or not these are the only English options. When they are, I'm forced to go out the 2-ch anaolg jacks and decode in pro logic, since the DMA-8 plus can't recognize the formats properly.

My question is, does Dolby make a "next level up" from the DMA-8 plus that properly decodes DolbyTrueHD? Or is the DMA upgradable via software? Does DTS make a similar product for decoding DTS Master Audio? It's getting to the point where I'm going to stop geting BluRays for the theatre and running standard DVDs. Tht would be unfortunate for the picture quality, but at least then I can always guaranty audio compatibility.

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 10-04-2008, 02:27 PM:

In some applications we choose DVD/Blue Ray players with discrete channel outputs. This way any decoding is passed via the DMA8 without the need to decode anything since the decoding is done in the DVD/Blue Ray player
Demetris

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-04-2008, 03:52 PM:

quote: Mike Olpin
There is no way to know when ordering a BluRay from Amazon weather or not these are the only English options.

I don't rely on specs posted at Amazon's web site. They're often incomplete or even wrong at times. It's better to visit a site like Blu-ray.com or other BD movie review sites to get a better idea of what's on the disc.

quote: Mike Olpin
When they are, I'm forced to go out the 2-ch anaolg jacks and decode in pro logic, since the DMA-8 plus can't recognize the formats properly.

What kind of BD player are you using and what sort of connection is being used to send the audio the player? HDMI? Old fastioned optical or coaxial? Analog leads?

Both Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio contain backward compatible data lossy "core" tracks. Any BD player should be able to send lossy core DD and DTS audio out of coaxial or optical connections. Some BD players offer the ability to internally decode Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio and send it as multichannel Linear PCM over HDMI connection or output it via 5.1 or 7.1 analog outputs.

Sony's Playstation 3 has to internally decode Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio and output it as LPCM 5.1 or LPCM 7.1 over HDMI. Some limitation in its chipset won't allow the raw, undecoded bit stream to go out over HDMI. It can still send DD and DTS audio via the optical connection.

There may be an additional problem with certain discs since they have 7.1 audio with four discrete surround channels, which is something commercial movie theaters should have adopted more than a decade ago, but appear to have no plans to do so. I'm wondering just how a movie theater would fold those four surround channels down into two for a traditional 5.1 setup.

Also, doesn't the DTS XD-10 processor have some capability for handling DTS-HD audio? Or is it just limited to decoding the "home" variants of DTS and DTS-ES?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-04-2008, 07:32 PM:

Very true, Both Dolby TrueHD and DTSHDMA core down to their shitty-ass counterparts that we all know and love on DVD. All you have to do is run the audio out of a digital port (optical, coaxial) that is not HDMI.

You are welcome. Send reward soon.

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 10-04-2008, 09:35 PM:

The player is a LG SuperBlu BH200. Audio is passed to the DMA via optical SPDFF.

All audio passed through the SPDFF seems one quarter to a half second out of sync. Audio from the analog L/R jacks are in sync. A standard DVD player is normally used via the same SPDFF input on the DMA and has not shown any sync issues.

On the BluRay player, the audio output options are "Primary Pass-Through", "DTS RE-Encode", and "PCM Stereo".

When Primary pass through is selected, and a standard Dolby Digital track is present, the DMA automatically lights up for Dolby Digital with Descrete decoding. If DTSHDMA or DolbyTrueHD is present, all lights on the DMA go out, and no decoding takes place.

When "PCM Stereo" is selected, the DMA automatically lights up for PCM with Pro Logic decoding, regardless of weather the dsik has Dolby Digital, DTSHD, or Dolby TrueHD.

DTS Re-Encode causes all the lights on the DMA to go out for obvious reasons.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 10-05-2008, 04:05 AM:

how about running film?

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 10-05-2008, 10:03 AM:

We always run 35mm when a suitable print is available. But we run A LOT of old films, many of which are unavailable on 35.

http://www.statetheatretc.org/?page=comingsoon

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-05-2008, 02:12 PM:

quote: Mike Olpin
All audio passed through the SPDFF seems one quarter to a half second out of sync. Audio from the analog L/R jacks are in sync. A standard DVD player is normally used via the same SPDFF input on the DMA and has not shown any sync issues.

Check for a firmware update. That sync issue seems to a pretty common problem with a lot HD related devices. My satellite TV receiver has a similar issue that still hasn't been corrected; it's one of the primary factors driving me to buy a new HDMI-equipped AV receiver.

Playstation 3 had a similar sync problem when playing DVDs with DTS audio tracks, but that was fixed with a firmware update. I saw the problem with the Saving Private Ryan DTS DVD. The first time I updated the PS3 system software the problem got fixed.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-05-2008, 07:49 PM:

Why are you using an LG player? LG stands for "Low Grade" so you can't really expect much out of it.

I see you are playing/played "Tell no One". I hope you didn't get the mysterious "no heads no tails" print that some other lame theater accused us of giving them.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 10-06-2008, 04:52 AM:

Boy, you got that Paul Newman Sunday set up fast. [thumbsup]

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 10-06-2008, 12:29 PM:

Again this highlights the problem of running what are domestic video formats in a theatre environment. They were not designed for this application. That's why the DMA-8 Plus does not support domestic formats, in the main.

Mike, you said something very interesting there - which BTW anyone could have said - and it shows how "DVD substitution" has been working its way into exhibition culture:

quote: Mike Olpin
We always run 35mm when a suitable print is available. But we run A LOT of old films, many of which are unavailable on 35.

Aha! But your theatre is not in fact running old films - it's running Blu-Ray DVDs! That's the difference. And, as more and more venues engage in "DVD substitution", it reduces the demand for new prints. It's a vicious circle.

NB - I am not in any way criticising you Mike or anyone else on this forum. I'm just raising concerns about people being asked to do things in the theatre environment which are not desirable from an engineering point of view.

One could lobby Dolby and DTS to manufacture software, firmware or hardware to support these domestic formats in the theatre but it would be interesting to hear their thoughts on this.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 10-07-2008, 11:15 AM:

LG's Blu-ray players have never been considered in the top tier for performance or features, so I would recommend looking into replacing the player with something better. LG and Samsung have some of the worst reputations for quality and reliability among Blu-ray players.

As someone who is most likely interested in giving his customers the best possible picture and sound, the new lossless formats are a gift, not a curse! For less than $500, you can upgrade your source device so that you can access those high definition soundtracks to go along with the high definition picture.

I don't know about pro-grade Blu-ray players, but Panasonic is coming out with the DMP-BD55 that has all the latest and greatest specs, as well as 7.1 channel analog audio outputs. The Sony BDP-S550 does as well, I believe.

I don't know how suitable these players are for your specific situation. Since you probably don't need the BD-Live functionality, you may be able to track down the previous gen models as well (just make sure they decode both Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio to the analog outs).

Amazon has the Panasonic DMP-BD55 on pre-order (10/28) for $400, and the Sony BDP-S550 is $400 as well.

Personally, I don't think it should matter whether you are showing movies on 35mm, DVD, or 8mm. You are showing movies in a community experience with the added value that you can provide over and above what people can experience at home. I applaud your desire to deliver the best experience possible!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-07-2008, 11:23 AM:

quote: Brian Guckian
One could lobby Dolby and DTS to manufacture software, firmware or hardware to support these domestic formats in the theatre but it would be interesting to hear their thoughts on this.

If the Blu-ray player has the ability to internally decode the lossless Dolby and DTS formats then that issue would be a moot point.

I don't know how a traditional booth setup would accommodate a HDMI connection to receive multichannel LPCM data. But if the equipment can accept 5.1 analog leads from the player then the problem should be solved.

Again, I think 7.1 analog output could open a can of worms. Some players on the market do have 5.1 analog output of decoded lossless surround formats. The Panasonic DMP-BD50 (soon to be discontinued) does.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-07-2008, 01:56 PM:

If the house is properly set up for EX, then 7.1 is doable in a discrete manner... at least from the amplifier point of view. I don't think something like the CP650 accepts 7.1 inputs.

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 10-08-2008, 06:12 PM:

The CP650 is "8 channel ready" albeit not at the "front end".

Presumably a new option card / Cat. 794 variant would activate full 8-channel capability there.

[EDIT for the record: this post was referring to the basic CP650, and Steve Guttag has pointed out that the existing Cat. 794 does have 8-channel inputs - apologies]

[ 10-11-2008, 07:43 AM: Message edited by: Brian Guckian ]

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 10-08-2008, 06:59 PM:

Assuming you're CP650 is EX capable. ( I know CP650 means EX before any pedantry starts!)

With a DMA8+ installed, select Format 87 6 Channel in + Surround EX on the CP650. It will decode the rear surround information from the Lt/Rt surrounds, in the time honoured manner.

The only way to access Le & Re on the CP650 is via AES/EBU inputs, and you must have the crossover card installed. (CP650 XO IIRC) You cannot use the Le/Re channels from any other source, and IIRC there's no Eq on them either.

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 10-10-2008, 10:16 AM:

Hi Pete - what about 7.1 discrete? Wondering if that could that be accommodated via the AES/EBU input in future with accompanying bitstream decoding via a new card, etc.?

The 650 block diagram is intriguing as it shows 2-channel and 6-channel signal paths as far as the I squared S to ESSI Convertor, then an 8-channel path out of there to the Slit-loss EQ and NR, the Matrix Decoder and the B-Chain EQ. Whereupon it splits...with 8-channels sent back to the Option Card and 6 channels forwarded to the 6-ch DAC and then on to the outputs.

Ah...the mysteries of the signal processing world! [Big Grin]

[EDIT: Apologies as I hadn't read up on the Cat. 791 Digital Crossover card which I see supports full-range Le and Re - thanks for the pointer, Pete]

[ 10-10-2008, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: Brian Guckian ]

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-10-2008, 06:24 PM:

Le/Re do indeed have full (EQ) processing with the appropriate card. You can either use the Cat 778 (digital audio output as well as AES3 audio input) or the Cat 791 (crossover card) to pick up those outputs. Note, the Cat 794 and the Cat 790 DO have 8-channels of inputs...they are unclear on how to use all 8 outputs...perhaps discrete EX...I'd have to check.

Steve

[Edited to correct wrong card number]

[ 10-11-2008, 07:21 AM: Message edited by: Steve Guttag ]

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 10-11-2008, 05:55 AM:

quote: Mike Olpin
We always run 35mm when a suitable print is available. But we run A LOT of old films, many of which are unavailable on 35.

http://www.statetheatretc.org/?page=comingsoon

the only video i see noted in the linked page is the opera salome, so i presume you found prints of all the listed films? btw, there are some inconsistencies in the ratings listed for wusa, the green berets, and hearts and minds.

quote: Scott Jentsch
Personally, I don't think it should matter whether you are showing movies on 35mm, DVD, or 8mm. You are showing movies in a community experience with the added value that you can provide over and above what people can experience at home.

come again?

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 10-11-2008, 06:55 AM:

Steve, interesting.

That conflicts with what Dolby UK told me recently when I asked the same question.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 10-14-2008, 10:35 AM:

quote: Carl Martin
come again?

Where is the confusion?

My point was that it doesn't matter so much what specific source was used to provide his presentation. People tend to get way to pre-occupied with internal bias about film vs. digital, and it distracts from the real end goal, which is to provide the audience with the best possible presentation with the resources available.

If the best source available is DVD or Blu-ray, there's nothing wrong with showing that (as long as the licensing issues are covered, of course). If the resultant image on the screen is unacceptable, then the theater has a choice about whether to go on with the show or select a different feature instead.

In my opinion, operating a movie theater is not about selling the movie, it's about selling the experience. The original poster was trying to deliver the best experience possible, and I was applauding him for that.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 10-14-2008, 02:09 PM:

of course the experience should be good. but job #1 is presentation of the film. if you run a quality restaurant and can only get frozen crabs, then crabcakes come off the menu.

if you can't get the film on film (if it's supposed to be) than you have to acknowledge that that is an "unavailable resource" and work towards making it available (getting a print struck, finding a collector print, importing one) rather than giving the public exactly what they can get at home, which isn't true to the work.

quote: Scott Jentsch
If the resultant image on the screen is unacceptable, then the theater has a choice about whether to go on with the show or select a different feature instead.

i guess if you're already playing the bait-and-switch game then that's a natural solution.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 10-20-2008, 03:51 PM:

At the risk of taking the dead horse out for another beating...

Showing movies on film is the only advantage a theater can deliver to its audiences?

Does it make more sense to show a film print of a classic movie where the colors are faded and the sound drops out, or to show that same movie in great condition using Blu-ray? Which approach serves the customer the best possible way?

So long as the resulting picture and sound are acceptable to the exhibitor (this is a matter of personal and professional judgement), who cares what format it comes on? This obsession with film being the only true way to display movies needs to be overcome, or perhaps another line of work should be considered.

Theaters are in show business. Put on a show for crying out loud! If all a theater is doing is spooling up a reel of film and hitting the start button, where's the "show" in that? They're not doing anything to add to the experience that people could get at home anyway.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-20-2008, 07:22 PM:

Scott,

The problem with your "its just a movie" approach is that it sets no standards. The professional medium of movies sets certain, engineering society defined, standards. While the end user may not be any more aware of those standards than they are of what goes into a UL listing for a product, they come to depend on those standards and presume that what they are seeing is the best that the industry has. If, for some reason, what they perceive is something closer to a home-grade product, then they may, rightfully, believe that the value of going to the theatre is little more than a group experience of what they already have at home.

For 35mm film...while yes it can be scratched and faded...sound drop outs in analog are rare. At what point does one make the determination that the film version is too far gone? I know it has to be made at some point. However, the exhibitor should denote that what they are showing is not film or cinema grade (DCI) digital.

I've now done several more Blu-Ray on the big screen viewings and they really don't stack up well to either film or professional digital screenings and should not, in any way, be passed off as such. To do so, believe it or not, cheapens the industry and actually hurts more than the offending theatre. Again, the perception is that what is seen in the theatre is no better than what is seen in the home. Even worse, what is acceptable in the home (in terms of compression contrast, color...etc) shows its ugliness when blown up to cinema size screens.

Once one tip-toes down the path of showing home-grade media in a professional environment (without informing the audience), then one has truly crossed the lines of deceiving the public. You can justify it in any way you want...but what is the difference between that and a sub-run theatre just showing DVDs...just because a film print (or digital) is available...who cares? DVDs are easier and cheaper.

Steve

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 10-27-2008, 09:40 AM:

Steve,

Thanks for helping me to clarify my point. The real emphasis should be placed on the theater to show a high quality presentation with the best possible picture and sound, first and foremost. If the best you have to work with is 8mm film, is showing the movie on 8mm more important than not showing it at all? How about VHS? Of course, that's stretching the example a wee bit, but it comes down to the theater deciding whether or not to show a movie based on its own standards, and not necessarily whether it's on film or not.

Since you've actually shown Blu-ray-sourced movies in a theater, you have more practical experience than I, but I am surprised to hear that a properly calibrated system would have color issues on Blu-ray when compared to a properly calibrated system on Film. This sounds vaguely familiar to a thread a couple of months ago...

Assuming that is the case, though (I have to take your word for it that you've done everything necessary to calibrate your system for showing Blu-ray discs), then it gets back to the quality of the presentation issue.

I think it would be entirely appropriate for the theater manager to present to the audience and say that "we really wanted to show this movie, and the best copy we could find was on DVD. DVD wasn't intended to be shown this big, but I think the discussion after the movie will be interesting nonetheless, so I look forward to discussing it with you afterward!"

There are other things that the theater can bring to the table when showing non-first-run movies. While it's important that the picture and sound be the best possible (that should be Job 1 for any theater), theaters need to look beyond the fact that they are threading film through sprockets as the differentiator between them and the home theater experience.

For many people, waiting 3-4 months for a movie to come out on video is preferable to going to a movie theater because going to the theater doesn't offer them anything compelling. The exclusivity window is fading year by year, and theaters have more to offer than that.

I'm just saying that theaters shouldn't get hung up on film being the be-all and end-all measure of professionalism.

Any theater that is just pushing the start button and not paying attention to the other aspects of the show are missing a huge opportunity to serve their customers. Doing more takes work and it takes some money, too. I can see why some theaters don't want to do any more than the bare minimum, but no one should be surprised when they're not in business any longer either.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-27-2008, 12:16 PM:

Scott,

As I said previously, it is one thing to inform the audience that what they are seeing is the best available and it is on DVD...and passing a DVD or other consumer-based media off as a professional presentation. The patron should be able to make an informed decision on it. Otherwise, you run the risk of cheapening the theatrical experience in the name of "well, its better than nothing." Sometimes, nothing is truly better.

Is film the be-all? Yes, at the moment. The more I look at the various mediums side-by-side or right after another...the more I distinquish video (including DCinema) as an inferior medium. Most recently...film versus digital 3D. While the film 3D has definite ghosting issues that the digial show did not...the digital 3D suffered from the lack of depth I've mentioned in other threads. In 3D, this manifests itself in what I can best describe is a South Park type animation (paper cut out style) but with 3D. As such, the objects while have a spacial representation (this is in front of that and separated by some amount of space), the depth of the object/character itself is unnaturally truncated. This was not the case in the film based 3D system I observed.

As to Blu-Ray...it is amazing what is acceptable in very small images (60" or so) and how that really falls apart on much larger images 20-feet to 40-foot wide screens. It is substantially better than just DVD but it is a FAR cry from DCinema or even broadcast quality HD tape (D5, HDCAM-SR). In particular, the contrast is quite wanting and the colors too seems to really be lack-luster in comparison.

For what its worth, I've now seen Blu-Rays on both Barco and Christie systems...freshly calibrated and the results were similar...better than DVD but not anything near professional HD quality. To be honest, I was quite surprised and a bit disappointed.

Steve

Posted by Phil Ranucci (Member # 3820) on 10-27-2008, 07:54 PM:

How are you getting the Blu-Ray into the Barco? We have a DP-100 and were told that we cannot get into the DP-100 at 1080i because the projector isn't HDCP compliant, so all we can use is the standard DVD outputs.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-27-2008, 08:57 PM:

First off, not all Blu-Ray titles (if any) have HDCP activation. Second...1080i is not necessarily the output rate...24p for 24p source material.

The Barco I've seen was a DP2000, not DP100. The DP2000 (and 1500 and 1200 will take the HDMI with just a DVI/HDMI cable) However, I've done consumer based HD on the DP100 and DP50 via an ImageProHD...and before you fault these rather good scalers...The other forms of HD (broadcast grade)...looked notably better than Blu-Ray.

Note, the DP1200, 1500, 2000 and I believe DP3000 can now be made HDCP compliant and hence Barco's ACS-2048 is HDCP compliant in/out to allow the 3rd generation projectors to be HDCP compliant.

The Christie projector was the CP2000-ZX. It is HDCP compliant right out of the box.

Note, if you look hard enough...there are HDCP strippers out there.

Steve

Posted by Phil Ranucci (Member # 3820) on 10-28-2008, 02:23 AM:

We're using the ACS2048 via the Dual DVI inputs to show the Metropolitan Opera and it works very well. I just get asked about Blu-Ray because that's the latest and greatest format that's being pushed.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-28-2008, 08:57 AM:

I find it amazing that Blue Ray looks as good as it does on a large theater screen... The data rate is no where near the JPEG 2000 rate for actual cinema stuff.

Mark

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-28-2008, 10:00 AM:

Pop in Kill Bill Volume 2, go to the scene where she is being buried alive and you will be pounding your fists.

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 10-29-2008, 05:03 PM:

That scene in Kill Bill makes me squirm.

All of our content runs through an ACS-2048, and I am very impressed at what that box can do.

Also, I am not my theatres booker or owner. My job is to take the content given to me, be it on 35mm, DVD, BluRay, DCinema, cable broadcast, or CineMedia satellite event, and make sure that it looks and sounds as good as I can technically make it.

Film will always be my first love, but the experience I've gained working with the wide variety of formats we run has also given me valuable knowledge and experience I didn't have before.

Now then, the solution to my question:
Ran the firmware updates, player seems more stable now, but it still cannot pass high bandwidth multi-channel streams out the optical output in a way that the DMA8Plus can see. The player does, as I mentioned earlier, have a DTS Re-Encode mode. I found a $200 box that decodes optical DTS into line level discrete analog outputs. I can route those into the 6-channel input on the DMA8Plus. Problem solved!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-29-2008, 06:58 PM:

Standard optical outputs don't have the bandwidth to carry bit streams of lossless Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD Master Audio or uncompressed Linear PCM. You have to use HDMI or decode the high resolution formats in the player and use analog outputs.

I don't know if other players do this, but the Playstation 3 has this default behavior: If you choose to output audio via the standard optical output then the PS3 will automatically send the lossy core audio from Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD audio tracks. The PS3 will only send LPCM multichannel audio from decoded Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD tracks when HDMI is chosen for audio output.

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 10-31-2008, 09:39 PM:

What's the issue with that scene in "Kill Bill Vol 2"?
I've looked at it and I see no evidence of artifacts either visual or audio.
Are you concerned with the black level?
Our projector doesn't seem to have a problem making black look black. (It's a Panasonic DW-10000, not DCI).

My experience with projecting BluRay is that it beats the quality of many of our prints especially for sharpness. Of course I wouldn't use it for scope as our fixed height screen makes it either letterboxed or zoomed for lower brightness - although we can also anamorph it for a lesser drop in brightness.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-31-2008, 10:02 PM:

quote: Peter Castle
What's the issue with that scene in "Kill Bill Vol 2"?
I've looked at it and I see no evidence of artifacts either visual or audio.

Look at page 104 of the "Is Anyone Consuming HD-DVD or Blu-ray" thread in the Afterlife forum. It's the second to the last page. Joe posted a couple of screen shots (camera photos taken of the display) to show the kind of banding he's seeing.

On my setup the banding didn't look quite that pronounced. I saw more steps of gradation. Still, the flaw is there. On the bright side, that flaw is only visible for about 1/10th of a second. Other than that, the Kill Bill: Vol. 2 disc is mostly excellent (if you overlook the deliberate crapping of imagery in the Pei Mei sequence).

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 11-01-2008, 07:15 AM:

I checked that scene on my setup and found some minor banding in still frame BUT I had an image NOTHING like the images posted. My picture has nowhere near the red content that those image have. In fact, there's no overload of any of the primaries. My setup is a PS3 via HDMI to a 1920 LCD.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-01-2008, 05:32 PM:

I didn't see the level of coarse color banding Joe saw in that Kill Bill: Vol 2 scene either. But I could see the macro-blocking well enough for it to be noticeable after Joe brought it to my attention. I don't know why different TVs seem show that scene differently. There's no deficiency in my Sony KDL52XBR4 HDTV. If it was failing to reproduce certain colors or something the color banding in that scene would look worse than what Joe's screen shot photos displayed.

One movie on BD that briefly looks like crap, at least on my TV, is Hellboy. I see some really obvious color banding in the opening titles, particularly where the "Hellboy" logo zooms away from the camera. The rest of the movie looks excellent.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 11-04-2008, 08:13 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
The other forms of HD (broadcast grade)...looked notably better than Blu-Ray.

Am I understanding you right, that broadcast, over-the-air, HDTV looks better on your setup than Blu-ray-sourced material?

I will defer to your practical experience, but on paper, that's just whacked. Except in cases of very poorly done Blu-ray titles (always a possibility), the Blu-ray version of a movie should always look better than something sent through the ATSC system.

Personally, I've never seen anything on OTA or Satellite HD that was better than Blu-ray and HD DVD. I'd be very curious to see the problems that you have seen for curiosity's sake.

I can believe how the better specs of D-Cinema (esp. in the range of color depth and data rates) and the potential of film should produce a better image on a 20-40' wide screen, but I would be surprised to see Blu-ray look unacceptable, especially on the smaller range of that screen width.

Just goes to show, nothing replaces practical experience, I guess.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-04-2008, 09:08 AM:

Maybe Steve is referring to the original master tapes before the material is compressed down for broadcast.

As for HD material that is received via broadcast, whether it is over the air, cable or satellite, that stuff is inferior to Blu-ray in terms of visual and audio quality.

Blu-ray provides the best quality of high definition video the general public can see in their homes. The only things better are the uncompressed original masters or a high bit rate 2K JPEG2000 D-cinema version. Joe six pack won't have access to either.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-04-2008, 10:46 AM:

The real issue is, if Joe SixPack goes into the theatre, will he be able to see that the theatre image and sound are better than what he has at home, OR will he still think his BluRay/HDTV home setup is better? Bet he does.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-04-2008, 11:43 AM:

Yes, when I refer to "broadcast grade" sources...I'm referring to the broadcast industry, not over the air. Thus, the "HD" sources I'm referring to are HDCAM, D5, HDCAM-SR...not satellite and Cable...there are so many variables in them it would be too hard to qualify. Generally, I've found cable to be the weakest of the consumer HD sources..with the quality ALL OVER THE PLACE.

Steve

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-04-2008, 12:30 PM:

quote: Frank Angel
The real issue is, if Joe SixPack goes into the theatre, will he be able to see that the theatre image and sound are better than what he has at home, OR will he still think his BluRay/HDTV home setup is better?

That depends on the quality and upkeep of equipment at the movie theater versus what Joe SixPack has at home.

In my town, I'd prefer watching movies at our local Carmike theater. But if I could only choose between our 12-plex at Central Mall and what I have in my living room, I would be watching Blu-ray discs in my living room. A good home theater setup can beat a poorly maintained movie theater with low end equipment.

quote: Steve Guttag
Generally, I've found cable to be the weakest of the consumer HD sources..with the quality ALL OVER THE PLACE.

Satellite TV has the same problem. Some shows, such as True Blood on HBO, generally look really good in HD while other shows can fuzz and macroblock all to hell. Even the best looking shows tend to have issues with fast motion or subtle color gradients.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 11-05-2008, 10:43 AM:

And that brings the discussion right back to the emphasis on the quality of the presentation.

Job 1 for any theater is to slam-dunk the presentation and make it the best it can possibly be. People are tired of poor presentations, backed by poor service and high prices.

When theaters deliver a sub-standard product, audiences start deciding to stay home. With the advent of Blu-ray and HD DVD, they are now able to put on a show at home that can exceed what they have come to expect from their local movie theaters. With a release window of 3-4 months, it's not that difficult to wait for the current blockbusters to hit their Netflix queue.

Putting together a good home theater takes effort and it can be costly to do, though. Theaters have the ability to provide that "restaurant" experience for movies, but so few of them do. Theaters that have solid presentations and back them with great service and reasonable prices (which combine for a positive movie-going experience) will attract customers.

I would wager that a properly calibrated and configured system sourced by Blu-ray would be perceived as equal to or better by the general audience than what they have been conditioned to expect from the usual film presentations at most theaters.

In the event that the picture can't be as good as one would like, I think customers are willing to put up with flaws so long as they feel that they aren't being ripped off. A simple presentation before the movie explaining the situation would assuage those concerns, especially in the instance of a movie that is a classic or a rare title.

If all the theater does is toss in a DVD of a movie with no concern about the presentation and surrounding movie-going experience, they deserve backlash from their audience.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-05-2008, 02:52 PM:

Scott, I was with you all the way util your wager on the quality of the Blu-Ray on the large screen. It really does fall apart a bit. Not like a DVD does and not that you can't "get away with it." The Blu-Ray is definitely sharper and overall a superior picture to a DVD, most definitely...but it is really a far cry from DCinema or Broadcast grade HD...as in it isn't a close call.

Now I have not seen many Blu-Rays so I have no doubt that some will be much better than others. That was definitely the case with DVDs too. In fact, I carry several DVDs with me when I set up my systems to show the range of image quality one can have off of such a system. Thus the customer won't complain to me about image quality due to the potential of having a poorly mastered DVD.

Steve

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-06-2008, 12:34 AM:

This reminds me. Occasionally we have events where the media choices are DVD, DigiBeta, HDCAM, and HDCAM SR. Depending on the event budget, we typically choose DigiBeta or HDCAM.

I do wonder where BD falls in this. I guess the obvious answer is "between DigiBeta and HDCAM, but way cheaper than DigiBeta."

Any real experience with that?

--jhawk

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-06-2008, 07:10 AM:

This may sound strange...but I've seen some DBeta projected rather large and it looked rather stunning...to the point, I'd DBeta the edge in several respects over Blu-Ray (especially if projected via 3-chip DLP). The resolution isn't as high, but it seems like everything else is superior.

Again, source is key. The best DBeta stuff I've personally worked with was from HBO...we did some _The Wire_ premiers (it was shot in and around Baltimore, MD). It was an SD show but man, what they were able to put on the DBeta tape was quite good.

Then again, when I've done film premiers for HBO, again, their prints are 2nd to none...they are all the equivalent to "EK" prints. HBO has already made the jump to HDCAM-SR. They generally shoot all of their shows on 35mm. Docus. are normally 16mm or video.

I'm not trying to diss Blu-Ray as I think it looks great on smaller screens but on large theatre screens and in comparison to Broadcast or DCinema Grade HD video...it isn't in the same league at all...not even close.

Steve

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-06-2008, 08:54 AM:

That's...curious. But of course, it is part of why I asked.

Still, when the choice is $300 to rent a J30 versus ~free for BluRay, it's a bit tough to explain why you want to choose the lower resolution format.

Have you seen the same material in both BD and DigiBeta? I find it hard to figure out why BD would look worse...compression? (and therefore "bad authoring"?)

--jhawk

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-06-2008, 10:18 AM:

Nope, I haven't had that opportunity. As to bad authoring...I dunno...one of the Blu-Rays, Blade Runner received very high praise from the video community.

Seriously...give it a good look on a large screen with top-notch equipment and tell me what you think. The whole look of Blu-Ray to professional video systems just isn't there.

As to justifying...why the extra expense...for at least one event, rent the J30 (not my first choice as it is just a "preview" player) and the Blu-Ray...switch between them and you tell me which looks better.

Steve

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-06-2008, 03:15 PM:

Hey, it's called "compact."

Are you saying that the J30SDI's SDI bitstream is going to be different from, say, a DVWM2000's, given the same digibeta tape?

I know there's a lot of difference for BetaSP decks (esp UVW vs. BVW, etc.), but that's harder to understand for what should be a digital process.

--jhawk

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-06-2008, 07:11 PM:

I believe that there is less flexibility for the J30 series and most, if not all only offer 2-channel ANALOG audio. So what is one to do if they have Dolby-E encoded 5.1 audio on the 3/4 pair?

Steve

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-06-2008, 09:04 PM:

The J30 will output audio over the SDI link, so you could get an SDI->AES/EBU box. I assume that channels 3/4 can be output over SDI as well, but have never tried this. Does this work with Dolby E? I don't know.

For Beta SP, I've found that the DVD-A500 is the best playback deck available (better than the DVW-M2000). Even though it's a Digi-Beta machine, the picture is crisper than on any of the PVW, UVW, or J series decks. I haven't compared it directly to a BVW machine, however.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-06-2008, 09:19 PM:

Yeah, I'd love to have that problem, Steve.
All the digibeta tapes I've seen have been just L/R stereo. [Frown]

(I almost had an HDCAM SR show with 5 bazillion channels, which would have been a problem, but then the tape was obsoleted and replaced by fibered footage that ended up being only L/R stereo.)

You are correct that the J30 series only outputs two channels.

--jhawk

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-06-2008, 09:42 PM:

It only outputs two channels at once, but you can select whether you want to hear channels 1/2 or 3/4. I don't know how this setting affects the SDI link, but channels 1/2 can definitely be sent via SDI (I've used J30s as source decks when making dubs, and the SDI cable is all that is necessary to send picture, sound, and timecode).